NATO Says It Might Now Have Grounds to Attack Russia

On Tuesday, June 14th, NATO announced that if a NATO member country becomes the victim of a cyber attack by persons in a non-NATO country such as Russia or China, then NATO’s Article V “collective defense” provision requires each NATO member country to join that NATO member country if it decides to strike back against the attacking country. The preliminary decision for this was made two years ago after Crimea abandoned Ukraine and rejoined Russia, of which it had been a part until involuntarily transferred to Ukraine by the Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev in 1954. That NATO decision was made in anticipation of Ukraine’s ultimately becoming a NATO member country, which still hasn’t happened. However, only now is NATO declaring cyber war itself to be included as real “war” under the NATO Treaty’s “collective defense” provision.

NATO is now alleging that because Russian hackers had copied the emails on Hillary Clinton’s home computer, this action of someone in Russia taking advantage of her having privatized her U.S. State Department communications to her unsecured home computer and of such a Russian’s then snooping into the U.S. State Department business that was stored on it, might constitute a Russian attack against the United States of America, and would, if the U.S. President declares it to be a Russian invasion of the U.S., trigger NATO’s mutual-defense clause and so require all NATO nations to join with the U.S. government in going to war against Russia, if the U.S. government so decides.

NATO had produced in 2013 (prior to the take-over of Ukraine) an informational propaganda video alleging that “cyberattacks” by people in Russia or in China that can compromise U.S. national security, could spark an invasion by NATO, if the U.S. President decides that the cyberattack was a hostile act by the Russian or Chinese government. In the video, a British national-security expert notes that this would be an “eminently political decison” for the U.S. President to make, which can be made only by the U.S. President, and which only that person possesses the legal authority to make. NATO, by producing this video, made clear that any NATO-member nation’s leader who can claim that his or her nation has been ‘attacked’ by Russia, possesses the power to initiate a NATO war against Russia. In the current instance, it would be U.S. President Barack Obama. However, this video also said that NATO could not automatically accept such a head-of-state’s allegation calling the cyber-attack an invasion, but instead the country that’s being alleged to have perpetrated the attack would have to have claimed, or else been proven, to have carried it out. With the new NATO policy, which was announced on June 14th, in which a cyber-attack qualifies automatically as constituting “war” just like any traditional attack, such a claim or proof of the target-nation’s guilt might no longer be necessary. But this has been left vague in the published news reports about it.

In the context of the June 14th NATO announcement that cyberwar is on the same status as physical war, Obama might declare the U.S. to have been invaded by Russia when former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails were copied by someone in Russia.

It’s a hot issue now between Russia and the United States, and so, for example, on the same day, June 14th, Reuters headlined “Moscow denies Russian involvement in U.S. DNC hacking”, and reported that, “Russia on Tuesday denied involvement in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee database that U.S. sources said gained access to all opposition research on Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.”

In previous times, espionage was treated as being part of warfare, and, after revelations became public that the U.S. was listening in on the phone conversations of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, espionage has become recognized as being simply a part of routine diplomacy (at least for the United States); but, now, under the new NATO policy, it might be treated as being equivalent to a physical invasion by an enemy nation.

At the upcoming July 8th-9th NATO Summit meeting, which will be happening in the context of NATO’s biggest-ever military exercises on and near the borders of Russia, called “Atlantic Resolve”, prospective NATO plans to invade Russia might be discussed in order to arrive at a consensus plan for the entire alliance. However, even if that happens, it wouldn’t be made public, because war-plans never are.

The origin of this stand-off between the U.S. and Russia goes back to promises that the West had made in 1990 to the last Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, not to expand NATO up to the borders of Russia, and the West’s subsequent violations of those repeatedly made promises. Gorbachev disbanded the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact, on the basis of those false assurances from Western leaders. Thus, Russia is surrounded now by enemies, including former Warsaw Pact nations and even some former regions of the Soviet Union itself, such as Ukraine and the Baltic republics, which now host NATO forces. NATO is interpreting Russia’s acceptance of the Crimeans’ desire to abandon Ukraine and rejoin Russia following the 2014 Ukrainian coup, as constituting a showing of an intent by Russia to invade NATO nations that had formerly been part of the Soviet Union and of the Warsaw Pact, such as Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia; and this is the alleged reason for America’s Operation Atlantic Resolve, and the steep increase in U.S. troops and weapons in those nations that border on Russia.

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to get more info on formatting

(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.

(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.

(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
<b>bold text</b> results in bold text
<i>italic text</i> results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
<em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
<strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
<q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
<cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
<blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:

a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.

and last but not least:
<a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in Name of your link

(4)No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:&nbsp;You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.

(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.

What can you expect from the Government? ….NATO, the CIA, other DHS Agencies and the DOJ Run Protection for US Treasonous Criminals in Congress, the Presidency, and others working for Government Agencies and the Military involved in Conspiracy, Terrorism, Organized Crime and Trafficking Operations for the benefit of Defense Contractors and other Corporations.

The West is building up an invasion force on the Russian border to be ready to invade if hybrid war western subversion in Russia can bring disorder and chaos like what happened in Russia in the 1990’s. NATO would then invade followed by the paramilitaries that are being created. The latter would slaughter Russians behind the invading NATO army like they did behind the invading Nazi Wehrmacht.

Russians see clearly that the US is following in the footsteps of the Nazis – for that is what the US is – the Nazi rogue state of the 21st century. This century will not be the American century. It will be the century when humanity puts down the US rabid dog that threatens all humanity with catastrophe.

Sorry but no one is going to war over a cyberattack – that is ridiculous.
This author really has a flair for the dramatic.
I have said this before and been ignored. Looked at this authors past writings and see if anything they have said had happened.

Odd then why one of Germany’s major newspapers came to the same conclusions.
It is a news organ who’s chief editor proudly says about himself that he – although not jewish – is a fullhearted Zionist (he stated that literally).

This IS totally nuts. There’s no way there’s any real evidence (which can’t be fabricated in the digital domain) in a so called cyber attack situation. It can be all propaganda.
It’s probably also aimed against the citizens of NATO subject countries to suppress freedom in information on the pretext of “enemy activities”.

Thats the point.
Usa (and others with usa blessing) can now implement wars or extreme sanctions against Russia easily by fabricating lies and fake attacks.
The public never get real evidences anyway, so this is basicly a full blanket for usa to start a war with Russia whenever whereever it wants.

Usa will abuse that articlle to the fullest, by forcing its vasal puppet “allies” to implement harsh sanctions and suicide decisions, all to hinder Russia in all ways possible.

That’s a new universal Reichstagsbrand.
Then they don’t even need to false-flag blow up buildings or false-flag shoot down planes anymore. They simply tell you: “Russia sent us a cyper virus, we must invade”.

Also they can now shut down parts of the Internet because “they want to protect our freedom of speech”.

Oh, no – we can’t have THAT. You may have noticed where the US is concerned, there’s one set of laws for “us”, and another set for everyone else . . . .

Which translates to “we can do it, but no-one else”.

As an aside it is interesting to run IPViking for a half hour, and note the sources of the IP attacks. Most Chinese sources are from “domestic” telco providers (so a high probability of bot-net attacks), whereas for the past few days a LOT of US originating “attack traffic” has been coming from Microsoft. So, does Microsoft have dicey security, or is Microsoft “working for someone else” . . . . .

Panting for war, Hegemon vassal Canada’s spy agency CSIS has this to say:

“”Russia is not modernizing its military primarily to extend its capacity to pursue hybrid warfare,” the 104 page report said, referring to the Kremlin’s use of irregular tactics to take over Crimea. “It is modernizing conventional military capability on a large scale; the state is mobilizing for war.”

Everywhere it seems agencies are exceeding their stations. Military types bellowing politics, spy agencies promoting military actions. Where does it end? War.

I believe the last sentence of the quote above is called in psychology ‘projection’.

It sounds like they are running out of ideas. Washington went from abusive, to threatening, to menacing, to hysterical, and now they are just being pathetic.

Today…

Kerry to Russia: Our patience is wearing thin. And it’s not a threat.

Russia to Kerry: Suck on it.

Today also,
The meeting, which started in Moscow on Wednesday, is attended by the delegations of the defense ministries of Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, representatives of the CIS Executive Committee and the Secretariat of the CIS Council of Defense Ministers.
Earlier it was reported that the parties would discuss the progress of implementing the Concept of Military Cooperation, the draft Concept of Aerospace Defense of the CIS States, as well as a plan of the joint work in 2017.

In addition, they are expected to adopt a number of decisions, including on interaction of the state secret protection services and on cooperation in the field of monitoring and assessing the radiation, chemical and biological situation.

James, the times are in fact dramatic. But Zuesse didn’t say it was likely. I think he is just pointing out the absurdity of the sicko infantile drama queens of the US. Of course a lot of hot air, with the stench of rotten teeth.

Why promote these type of pieces? Is it the only analysis of the current situation around?
I read alternative media not to get a copy of CNN but to get information that is not in the MSM. Issues such as war are life threatening I don’t want drama just facts not spin

Did you know what is now accessible and manged online?
Power Plants, Satelites, Rocket bases, the lamps in your street, airports, aircrafts, cars, really everything! I doubt you have the slightest clue whatsoever.

And even if somebody dropped the plug on _all_ the most secure objects (because that’s safer than the best possible highly sophisticated packet filter or firewall), then folks can still tell the public that Putin’s 4yo brother of his aunt’s uncle’s newspaper delivery man has intruded into whatever nuclear powerplant to blow it up.

Had Eric Zuesse predicted in August 2001 that the US/Israel would blow up their WTC to invade 7 middle-eastern countries, I don’t want to know what you might have called that.

USA makes up the rules as they go… the very exceptional nation does not see any need to follow International law … etc etc …. well if they want war with Russia they will have war and they will be destroyed… do they really want to try that…. ?

Yes they want that.
A bully never stops untill it has gotten its teeth knocked out.

But most of the zionists will escape, because they use other groups to do their difrty work.
And its a pyramide game. Its a big pyramide, so they have endless pieces they can despose of beneath without the pyramide collapsing.
But it will only repeat in cycles through thousands of years, untill one day someone get rid of the dragonheads at the top of the pyramide.

A very weird article. It speaks of NATO’s “grounds” to attack Russia. The obvious question is: why would they need any “grounds” to attack anyone, including Russia, if they want to? They simply go and do it. That talk of “grounds” presupposes some “higher authority”, some “divine court” in front of which one is supposed to first demonstrate “a valid cause” for attacking … and should the “higher authority” accept that as “valid”, only then can one go on and attack… What a pile of garbage…

You are absolutely right. They need false-flags and “explanations” to manipulate internal so-called “public opinion”, the emotional attitude of the sheeple of the land. Implication is that any regime needs some “support” from its own mindless mass. Although much less important for external “opinions”. Hitler didn’t need any false-flags and excuses to attack USSR. Reminds too of that Aesop fable of the wolf blaming the sheep for muddying his drinking water even though the sheep was downstream – and then eating the sheep anyway: one can say anything.

Because the west always has to assume the moral high ground. You saw it, Morty – he was askin’ for it. The Exceptional Nation never backshoots anyone – instead, it makes up a victim narrative to explain why it had to mobilize the world’s most powerful military, regretfully, in self-defense.

So you opine it’s all “garbage” eh … and say “That talk of “grounds” presupposes some “higher authority”, some “divine court” in front of which one is supposed to first demonstrate “a valid cause” for attacking … and should the “higher authority” accept that as “valid”, only then can one go on and attack…”

What exact age are you and what grade are you in?.. Not to know that even a thief has made up a thousandth excuses for why he should steel. A killer the same. Elementary psychology 101 or even just common sense (if used) will tell you that every human being and the social organizations he’s in, has an existential need to rationalize and somehow justify it’s beliefs and actions no matter how cruel or illogical, both within it’s own mind and between each other.

Contrary to what you claim in the case of the US and NATO, it absolutely needs a reason or pretense and plausible excuse not only to justify an attack in it’s own mind, but also to sell it to all of it’s member states, it’s own populations at home and the soldiers that will kill and die on the battle grounds “defending” it’s cause, however irrational and insane it may be.

Now I don’t know what’s sticking up your (were the sun don’t shine) but what gives you the right to rudely insult the intelligence of this fine author, Eric Zuesse who has privileged us all here by sharing his vast knowledge and giving us nothing but the raw facts on the matter. Unlike your twisted and totally illogical little arrogant rant about NATO not needing the approval of some “higher authority” in order to just go out and “attack” Russia. Get in the real world eh!

As they say in computer lingo “garbage in garbage out” so it goes with the human mind.
(Removed,please do not insult other commentators.MOD)
As you’ve so ingloriously demonstrated to us all here.

Excuse my furious wrath if not my french, but brattisness and brash impertinence are no excuse or a substitute for trying to back up one’s arguments in a debate, particularly when they are as weak and feeble as yours have been here.

Mr Zeusse’s calm restraint is admirable. I would have been tempted to tear the insulter a new one, but I must admit that Mr Z’s superior control over his brain valve controlling the flow of vitiriol/adrenaline is something worth working on. It may have an even better effect than your rant or my follow on, on those in the vicinity of this argument, who are weighing the evidence.

What amazes me is all the commenters with very limited real world experience of almost anything rejecting all inputs that don’t mesh with their egos and opinions and ideology, which for the most part are never really even their own. They were planted there with the further imbedded instruction: ” reject all further evidence out of hand which does not comfortably fit in with this program and these files we have downloaded into your cranium.”

The transparent signs of Empire mind control. Unless you are regularly inputting new data from a very wide, eclectic array of sources, sifting, adjusting, discarding fallacies, tweaking, reworking, rethinking, and enjoying the discomfort of knowing that your picture of reality is never complete and can never be complete (So never stop working on it, for heaven’s sake!) rest assured: You are under so much mind control that you must count yourself as an Empire asset. And therefore of no use to the cause of truth, love, or freedom. Calcification, mental stasis is deadly.

There is no survival for the western deep state players, their lackeys(((elites))) short of world war 12. You know, the one after WWII…

The word is out on their activity, I mean everyone and their dog is aware of their agenda.
What has been done to Europe alone is more than enough to skin alive everyone in political leading positions, that has not resigned all screamed all year.

Then I guess economic warfare ought to be elevated by Russia to a ‘war domain’ as well, and deliberate attempts to wreck its economy a legitimate pretext to go to war against NATO. Is that what you really, really want, Fallout Spice?

Simple hacking into Hillary’s emails would not be enough. Maybe something along the lines of an ‘accident’ at US (or other) nuclear facility with many civilians killed. After a brief investigation the verdict is reached that the cause was Russia hacking the computers in a deliberate and provocative act to create terror in the country . The obvious conclusion is then reached the US (NATO) has no choice but to act. But before that a summit would be handy just to make sure the euro poodles will tow the line.

An Australian ex-military officer has revealed that Obama planned to use Australian and German troops, with US aircover, to attack Russia following the shoot down of MH17. The plan didn’t go ahead because Germany backed out. That basically implies that NATO knows that Russia, and by extension the Novorossians, did not shoot down MH17, leaving only Ukraine (or less likely NATO) involvement.

Russia has invoked its right of self defense in the UN after the deliberate shoot down of the flight over Egypt. It is going after the perpetrators. Presumably, should it wish, it could also go after those countries that support ISIS/Deash/whatever under the same legal authority.

In essence, Washington is saying that it reserves the right to declare war on any country just because it wants to. It certainly will not produce evidence to prove that it was hacked because, of course, that would necessitate divulging “classified” information. It won’t even provide simple satellite photos of the Malaysian jetliner shoot down it claims to have. I’m beginning to understand why the usually sane countries of the EU have been willing to go along with every crazy demand made upon them by Washington with respect to Russia. Washington will consider them to be an enemy in collusion with Russia and attack them too when it decides to start lobbing nukes. The only way Europe evades total annihilation is to all act together in opposition to America’s madness, and that is not about to happen with the likes of Poland, the Baltics and other eastern European countries champing at the bit to take a bite out of Russia’s hide. Big mistake in letting those folks into your club, ladies and gentlemen. I sincerely doubt that Washington would vacate all the NATO bases in Europe even if ordered out by the host countries. Washington would whip up spontaneous coups against governments that even discussed such a possibility. This is looking seriously bleak.

eg
ST. PETERSBURG, June 16. / TASS /. Moscow suspects that the West would like to preserve the Jabhat al-Nusra terrorist organization (outlawed in Russia) in some form and use it for the overthrow of Syria’s current authorities, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said at a meeting of the Valdai discussion club on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.
READ ALSO
Russia calls for long-term truce in Syria’s Aleppo – diplomat
Russian diplomat cites reports Turkish military advisers command militants near Aleppo
Russia postpones airstrikes in Syria to allow armed groups to separate from al-Nusra
Moscow concerned Jabhat al-Nusra is percieved as deterrent to Damascus – FM
Moscow says US unable to force Syria opposition to distance itself from Jabhat al-Nusra
“One has the impression that some sort of gambling is underway, that some would like to keep Nusra handy in some form to eventually use it for the overthrow of the regime,” he said. “At least, I put a straight question to John Kerry. He vowed it was not so. But then it remains to be seen why the Americans, given the opportunities they have, are unable to pull the groups they cooperate with out of the territories controlled by the bandits and terrorists. ”
According to Lavrov, Moscow is urging the United States to be more patient on the Syrian issue.
“I’ve seen John Kerry’s statement [to the effect patience regarding the future of Bashar Assad was wearing thin – TASS] and I found it surprising,” Lavrov said. “Normally Kerry is a self-reserved politician. I do not know what happened. I saw US Department of State’s explanations of what Kerry said, too. One should be more patient.”

ST.PETERSBURG, June 16. / TASS /. Moscow offers the European Union to jointly revise bilateral relations, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said at the Valdai club session at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on Thursday.
“We took ‘inventory’ of relations with the EU and put this on paper, the document was extensive,” Lavrov said. “We hope to hand it over to our colleagues and suggest carrying out such ‘inventory’ together.”
Lavrov stressed that Russia’s dialogue with the EU has never been interrupted. “We hope that after putting on paper the facts, the state of affairs as we see them and as the EU sees them, it will be clear and this will help us to begin a business-like conversation casting aside all geopolitical talk and the rhetoric of state-mongers. ”
Selective approach to dialogue with Russia
The EU’s selective approach to dialogue with Russia will no longer work, Lavrov added.
READ ALSO
Lavrov: EU learns “sanctions reflex” from US
Juncker: EU, Russia should continue dialogue
Lavrov notes US, EU politicians said Ukraine not only reason for anti-Russian sanctions
Russia will remain main partner for EU in energy sector in immediate future – Lavrov
Lavrov: History shows Russia’s special role on European and global arena
“The authoritative audience that gathered here is interested in finding ways of mending relations that currently exist between Russia and the West,” the minister said. “We have never sought confrontation speaking out in favor of equal and mutually beneficial dialogue.”
“As for the European Union, we were open to broad strategic partnership,” he went on to say. “Now we hear statements from Brussels that Russia is not a strategic partner, even though it remains a strategic state.”
“This juggling with words is well-known to us,” Lavrov noted. “It is a cover-up of the EU’s inability and unwillingness at this stage to realize what is happening in reality.”
Commenting on the so-called five principles of EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini regarding the Russian-EU relations, the minister noted that “they give us no answer on what should be done.”
“These principles just register the EU’s approach, which is to limit relations with us to the greatest possible extent in some areas, including the energy sector, and invite us to cooperation there where it plays into the EU’s hands. It is clear that such selective approach will not work, “Lavrov said, adding that business as usual is ruled out.
Russia-EU energy cooperation
According to the minister, the EU’s approach on curbing cooperation in the energy sphere with Russia is generated from overseas.
“The doctrine documents in the energy sphere adopted by the European Union are aimed at reducing dependence on Russia,” Lavrov said. “And we understand that here, most of such attitude on curbing cooperation with Russia is generated from overseas. Americans have their own economic interests,” he added.

Probably priming for PACE “things” in the Autumn,eg Mogherini new EU Defence security policy, or maybe just before renewal of sanctions in July? Or saying either “with us’ or against us….re Warsaw Conference in case that makes any pronouncements???
Or Rus will do its thing in Syria now to the end and **** off anything else, not sure of status of Syrian talks ………….

and
ST. PETERSBURG, June 16 / TASS /. The United States and the European Union are getting tired of Kiev’s whims over the crisis settlement in Donbass, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told a session of the Valdai discussion club held as part of SPIEF-2016 on Thursday.
“Ways of settling the Ukraine crisis can be discussed endlessly. There are the Minsk Accords and any attempts to rewrite them are impossible and unacceptable. We hope that our western partners will continue doing pastoral work with Kiev,” Lavrov said.
“Moreover, the Germans and the French and even the Americans are getting tired of the whims of their fosterlings. They have to implement

Your computer system is crashing. What do you do?
a. Call IT and get the problem solved
b. shake your fist in the air and rant about “The Russians” or “Putin Did It”
c. Call your boss to launch missile strikes

author mis-characterizes nato art 5. art 5 is subservient to national law and custom – it requires a review, not an “automatic” response of war. read the documents associated with the original signing…

that said, nato consists of servile and obedient startps – they’ll probably do as they are told…

” Gorbachev disbanded the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact, on the basis of those false assurances from Western leaders. Thus, Russia is surrounded now by enemies, including former Warsaw Pact nations and even some former regions of the Soviet Union itself, such as Ukraine and the Baltic republics, which now host NATO forces”

1) There was no real purpose and logic on Gorbachev actions. Why to disband USSR – WARSAW PACT? Even though there was proxy wars between the two blocs (Angola, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Nicaragua etc), a NATO invasion of Russia and Eastern Europe was not possible. Well, now it is !

WARSAW PACT militaries were very strong and USSR was a nuclear armed superpower.

What it has now as a NATO member ? 27,000 standing troops, 160 tanks and 12 sukhoi and 15 Mig 29……

The build up of USSR and Eastern Bloc defences costed enormous amounts of money and resources that alternatively could have been used to improve life quality and consumer product availability . Eventually all these weapons were sold for scrap by the new regimes who transformed national militaries into very small private professional NATO forces with american designed weapons ……

2) Most Eastern Bloc governments (Honecker’s Eastern Germany, Ceausescu’s Romania etc) opposed Gorbachev’s actions and remained committed to the continuation of the same socialist economic politics. Eventually, Gorbachev sold them out and all these governments collapsed. Ceausescu was executed in a kangaroo trial, after his overthrow. Even though western media talked about a “revolution”, it was a coup that followed a successful colour revolution attempt. High ranking ex members of the Romanian Communist still dominate the Romanian politics today.

3) There was no economic recession in USSR and Eastern Bloc even though there was a slowing down of growth and some countries (Yugoslavia, Romania etc) were indebted to the West and implemented austerity measures.

Even though various “analysts” talk and talk about a terminal decline of USSR economy that caused its collapse, USSR economy wasn’t in a bad shape. There are numerous western countries (Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, France etc) in far worse economic crisis today but the pro-NATO regimes remain intact and USA is not willing to abandon its european protectorates. NATO-EU member Greece has lost 40% of its GDP and real unemployment is well over 40%.

Even the regimes of Cuba and North Korea survived the end of cold war. Countries that still follow central planning, with far weaker economies and lower level of development (than the USSR), with trade embargoes in existence, and no significant natural resources.

The tragic economic and social disaster that struck Russia and Eastern Europe in the 1990s was the result of the adoption of neoliberal capitalism and the creation of a new oligarchic class.
For example, East Germany’s significant industry was liquidated by the West German Treuhand with millions of workers becoming unemployed and millions relocating to the West……

4) Gorbachev, Yeltsin and other members of the state nomenklatura are responsible for the destruction of USSR and Warsaw Pact. Their aim was to restore capitalism and integrate with the global economy. From apparatchik to “businessmen”. And in order to achieve this they had to get rid of USSR with its “socialist” constitution and economic mechanisms.

This process eventually backfired and caused an economic and political disintegration. Not because of central planning but the decision to end central planning (late 1980s) is what has caused economic havoc. USSR was all powerful in early 1980s and no one could have predicted its demise, but by early 1990s it disappeared without a trace.

@xvg Nice post, but the explanation given omits the broader context of the Cold War and the drama that played out between Gorbachev and the Reagan administration. Here is how this appeared to me:

The United States had sought to force the Soviet Union into an arms race with the goal of causing instability and collapse of the USSR.

Gorbachev appeared to see the pointlessness of this and sought to end the arms race and Cold War. For that he was greatly popular among the Western public. He was not popular in the Reagan administration, however. It was perceived that he was not willing to dismantle the socialist structures of the USSR and this was unacceptable. As events progressed he was forced to make more and more concessions perhaps far more than he had originally intended. Ultimately he was finally offered a “junior partnership” with the West in which the USSR would surrender its allies and independent financial and economic systems.

It seemed to me that Gorbachev made several fatal errors. The first was failing to understand that the purpose of the Cold War had always been to force the collapse of the USSR and Socialism and the seizure of its wealth. The US did not want to end the Cold War unconditionally although it might have appeared that doing so would also benefit the US. The second error was assuming that he could compromise and bargain with the West. The West required that everything be sacrificed.

You confuse what Gorbachev “said” vs. what he “did”.
I’ve listened to many interviews with Egon Krenz. He said that Gorbachev is a plain liar and plays different shows when talking to different people.

Gorbachev is simply an anti-communist.
And here are his grand achievements:

If so, that’s quite remarkable. Gorbachev had advanced to the pinnacle of the elite of the USSR. For him to then choose to destroy that society for reasons of ideology would seem to put himself at huge personal risk for highly uncertain gain. If that is the case, I would guess he could not have done this purely of his own volition. I would guess he must have had a handler or handlers to help manage the process. Perhaps someone like David Rockefeller, or Kissinger? Surely not Reagan or his administration.

Well, since they began to lose the narrative – that would be about the time that the industrial/government began to build the railroads. The American Transcendentalists tried to stop it – futile…read Melville…

Since then they need stories- the Maine blowing up, Pearl Harbor, Lusitania, Tonkin…9-11…now some silly claim anybody could make up. This is a very weak story… Weak in the face of a long-lost narrative…

But even these stores are losing traction now. Nobody believes what they hear on TV now. Not in California. I’ve gone from rural bar to rural bar, and listened… They’re nuts, ignorant, but they also don’t believe anymore… Dangerous? You Bet!

I have overheard ordinary farmers in a barnyard talk about “watching the squibs going off” as the demolition charges took down the towers – they saw it for what it was, when it happened. Ordinary hick farmers… That’s a lost narrative… Way lost.

In a way W2 was “over” for the nazis when things turned at Stalingrad…

In a similar “5G war” way it’s over already for the murkinazis…they lost. Now they must realize it…that’s the dangerous part.

Anybody watched the old films from Nuremberg? Yeah. Recognition of defeat involves some realization that there may be costs to pay… Makes things kinna tricky, eh?

The West has lost its sanity. Or whatever it had of it. Once.
To think of starting a war with Russia is beyond insanity. Can unchecked arrogance propel the West to the point of luring their own demise?

USA Nato position on Russia,s borders have some purposes. First to squeze Russia economically, politically, and stategically and second to build iron cage around Russia border coz USA Nato want to run biggest operation in Syria, eliminating all Syria’s infrastucture and Russia Air force can do nohing to give full back up from their mainland. Only God knows

Zusse writes;
“The preliminary decision for this was made two years ago after Crimea abandoned Ukraine and rejoined Russia, of which it had been a part until involuntarily transferred to Ukraine by the Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev in 1954.”

This is from an article in Wilson center.:

“The earlier published documents, and materials that have emerged more recently, make clear that the transfer of Crimea from the RSFSR to the UkrSSR was carried out in accordance with the 1936 Soviet constitution, which in Article 18 stipulated that “the territory of a Union Republic may not be altered without its consent.” The proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting indicate that both the RSFSR and the UkrSSR had given their consent via their republic parliaments. One of the officials present at the 19 February session, Otto Kuusinen, even boasted that “only in our country [the USSR] is it possible that issues of the utmost importance such as the territorial transfer of individual oblasts to a particular republic can be decided without any difficulties.” One might argue that the process in 1954 would have been a lot better if it had been complicated and difficult, but no matter how one judges the expeditiousness of the territorial reconfiguration, the main point to stress here is that it is incorrect to say (as some Russian commentators and government officials recently have) that Crimea was transferred unconstitutionally or illegally. The legal system in the Soviet Union was mostly a fiction, but the transfer did occur in accordance with the rules in effect at the time.”

Sitemap

Saker Android App

An Android App has been developed by one of our supporters. It is available for download and install by clicking on the Google Play Store Badge above.

All the original content published on this blog is licensed by Saker Analytics, LLC under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 International license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0). For permission to re-publish or otherwise use non-original or non-licensed content, please consult the respective source of the content.